# Poll: Is CS moving towards an "R" rating?



## Pablo (Oct 13, 1997)

Hi all,

ClubStogie has always been about cigars, and that remains our direction. Sure cigars are an adults domain, along with the sportsbook, and some of our games, etc.. All this being said...

Club Stogie does not want to become one of those sites you have to hide when kids are around, or the content is questionable at work. The fact is many of our users visit the site while at work, and many of us have kids. We are growing quite fast, and want to remain clean and focused. Your opinion is appreciated on the following poll.


----------



## MoTheMan (May 24, 2003)

No! I think we're PG13!!


----------



## LasciviousXXX (Oct 12, 2004)

I believe that we like all sites have our moments where the content might not be terribly appropriate but the majority of content on CS is pretty PG-13. Just my opinion but I appreciate the intelligent discussions that are held as well as some of the more off-the-wall silly threads. 

So in summary, no... I think we're keeping some semblance of civility


----------



## dayplanner (Dec 11, 1997)

Some posts with mild A/C is ok as long as there are warnings in the post. There seem to be some from time to time, I think I may have included a few links in the past, but I always made sure to warn people of what the link contains.


----------



## GOAT LOCKER (Aug 7, 2004)

Nah, I think this place is pretty tame. Besides, I would expect all here to be at least 18, right? I don't look in the jokes section much, so maybe I'm missing out on some of this content? Funny thing, at work, the only thing that is blocked is 1f1fan's HK pic in his sig! Wouldn't want military folks to see a gun :r .


----------



## txmatt (May 22, 2004)

There have been a few recent posts I would not have wanted to pull up at work but nothing too bad.

Another board ([H]ardOCP maybe?) has people NSW in front of a post that has graphics that may be objectionable. I would ask that members use this, A/C or a similar flag in the Title of any such post.. Problem solved IMO..

-Matt-


----------



## IHT (Dec 27, 2003)

i think we've had some seriously "racy" posts. 
i don't have much of a problem with it, but when the TOPIC of the post is just as "racy" that's when it becomes a problem.

we are adults, and if we know what we're about to look at what could be offensive, then don't open it. especially if the topic is offensive already.

a link to another site should not be a problem, as it takes the person to CLICK it in the first place, who is to blame? the person who posted it, or the person who knew it was going to be offense yet still clicked the link? but, the TOPIC should not be blatently offensive in its own right. <--- that last line is the only problem i've seen.

now, i know i started the first CS short story, and it got kinda explicit, but not nearly as bad as a current topic going right now...

to me, it's not a bother. if i know it's something that could be offensive to others who are looking over my shoulder:
* they shouldn't be looking over my shoulder
* i shouldn't be looking at the stuff at work or with my son around
* who do I blame when I click the link

so, as long as we don't have large nude photos uploaded to the pages, and the topics don't say (in all caps), something offensive, i don't think we'll have a problem. someone mentioned somewhere that a possible acronym in the title might help...

i have a co-worker who sends out highly offensive stuff via work email, and he uses a military term (6) or (watch your six) to let everyone know not to open it unless it's in private company...

i've blabbed on long enough.
i voted we were headed to an R rating, but i would probably change it to PG-13.


----------



## zemekone (Aug 1, 2004)

MoTheMan said:


> No! I think we're PG13!!


I agree with Mo Rated PG13 in 2005 not PG13 1995...


----------



## WillyGT (Sep 13, 2004)

YEah I think also the content as been mild enough and the times it has gotten more explicit is through a link. so I agree it still is PG-13, and we all should warn everybody if it is going to be "R". Hey PDS, there are some icons used when starting a new thread (smilies, a little note, and others), maybe there could be one that says "R" or something that advices is a mature Topic.
JUst my .02.


----------



## kansashat (Mar 13, 2004)

I don't believe, for the most part, that we are "R" rated, but I do believe we could be headed in that direction if we aren't careful.
It's a touchy subject.
I think if we display a little discretion & sensitivity, & remember that we cater to all BOTL's & SOTL's, we will be fine.
I do believe that we need to beware in creating an atmosphere of oversensitive political correctness.
There's got to be a balance of good taste & good fun that can be achieved.

I do hope that no one found my "Dogmover" story to be in poor taste cause I had so much fun writing that one.  Plus, every word of it was true!


----------



## DonJefe (Dec 1, 2003)

Oh man Khat said PC! A PC Jungle is a scary thought!!!!! As others have said, I think we are PG-13 and it seems for the most part the members here know the limits.


----------



## Bruce5 (Jul 27, 2003)

I think I may have gotten a little carried away on a post lately....crossing over PG. If I offended anyone, I truely apologize. 
.
I will keep Paul's thoughts in mind. I doubt it would have been brought up if it was not a concern to someone.


----------



## LasciviousXXX (Oct 12, 2004)

I think Paul is referring to the recent Mammiferous thread Bruce.

Hell, I thought your post was pretty funny (referring to the Short Story posts).


----------



## Jeff (Jan 2, 2005)

I think the CS jungle is still reasonably tame. There have been a few posts with pics that are a tad racy, but other than that, it is all about the cigar. I believe that all the gorillas do a good job of monitoring themselves.j

Jeff


----------



## Da Klugs (Jan 8, 2005)

Club Stogie is part of its members lives. Just like our lives for the most part things are PG rated here. You get PG-13, and occasionally R rated activities which makes sense since it is the collective thoughts and experience of the members are represented in our posts. There is a big difference between contextually significant or humorous content and merely crass posts. Common sense and Decorum are the words that come to mind.


----------



## Scott M (Jan 4, 2005)

I concur with the statements here. Most of the stuff on this site is pretty tame by comparison, and the mutual direction, (the appriciation of fine cigars), has a level of culture and civility not associated with other acitivities. 

I frequent several other BB's, most of which have Moderators that monitor the posts and occasionally delete a "questionable" thread. I haven't seen anyone being specifically refered to as a moderator, so I don't know if that's a possibilty, (or even necessary) here. 

On AR15.com, the phrase "BOTD", (babe of the day), or some other warning is required in the title when posting a thread containing skin. Again, I don't think the members here would revert to such an adolescent level of posting scantilly clad girly photos just for grins, but it's a decent tag line just the same. 

We're all adults. I'd like to think we can limit our "interests" to the main theme of this board.

Scott"myopinionsarefree"M


----------



## Roger Miller" (Apr 15, 2004)

I voted yes -- we are moving.
I think k-hat has done a good job of articulating my sentiments.



kansashat said:


> I don't believe, for the most part, that we are "R" rated, but I do believe we could be headed in that direction if we aren't careful.
> It's a touchy subject.!


Regulating speech is always a rat's nest, it is never done right. However, if you haven't noticed, there HAS been a dramatic increase in sophomoric boy's locker room talk on the board. Not that it's "bad" but i believe it belongs in the locker room, not the living room. (perhaps a new forum?) I really don't find it terribly offensive as much as i find it just in bad taste. I am mindful that we have a full cross section of society here.



kansashat said:


> I think if we display a little discretion & sensitivity, & remember that we cater to all BOTL's & SOTL's, we will be fine.
> I do believe that we need to beware in creating an atmosphere of oversensitive political correctness.
> There's got to be a balance of good taste & good fun that can be achieved.


Well said! The internet removes social barriers. I'd like to think of Club Stogie as a place that does not forget that, and it's members behave accordingly.

_____
rm


----------



## DAFU (Dec 14, 2004)

:fu .............how would you rate me???


----------



## G-Man (Feb 20, 2004)

I voted NO. With that said, I only frequent the forums that I joined this site for. The World Cigar Lounge and the Review Forums. In those forums there isn't anything (IMO) that has crossed the line. I occasionally visit the other forums and there is some humorous stuff on there that may offend some, but I agree with some of the others in that is if it is questionable, don't read it. Overall, I think this is a great site with a lot of great people and I am happy that I am able to enjoy everyones experience, wisdom and occasional sense of humor. 

I would not want to implement some sort of censorship or let a moderator determine what is or isn't offensive. To me, that would change what forums in general are about. I think the police ourselves is the best policy. If you feel someone crosses the line, send them a friendly PM.


----------



## RcktS4 (Jan 13, 2005)

I'm a very new transplant here, but I have to say that overall, this is one of the most civil boards I have participated in.

I do some surfing at work, and I wouldn't really be happy to pop open a hardcore **** shot while expecting softcore stogie ****, but I have never seen anything like this on here. I do limit my surf to mainly the world cigar and reviews board, though.

I despise the idea of censorship, but I even more highly revere class and decorum. So far, I haven't seen anything offensive to me on this board. I hope it'll stay that way due to the maturity and goodwill of nearly eveyone I have encountered here.
CS rocks.


----------



## Matt R (Dec 12, 1997)

I will vote for moving towards "R" rating. Personally, doesn't bother me or affect me at home or at work. But, I know for a fact that it does bother other people here. Some people have positions in their employment that could be jeopardized if they were to be caught with some of the things posted on here. Now, those things may be PG-13 to you or I, but what about to the lady in Human Relations who has had a history of sexual abuse or has been degraded in some form or another, in her past. Do you want to be responsible for her taking out her wrath on a fellow gorilla?? I know I do not. I also don't want to be responsible for a parent having to explain that those bouncing breasts in that picture aren't real, or are just a joke, to their young daughter. 

A few have mentioned that they see worse at other sites. Is that an excuse to bring some of the things that are not as bad here?? We have a PM feature on the board here. This could be used to pass on some of the stuff that may be unsuitable to some audiences. As well, the e-mail feature is there too.

I have a feeling that the reason you don't see a few people on here as much as before is that they have either had the site blocked or are blocking it themselves so as not to "get in trouble". I know poker had this issue when another forum we used to frequent started allowing NSFW type posts. He didn't open them, except by accident, while at work, but the IT guys who track the internet use did.

So, IMO, we should try and tone it down a bit. If for no other reason, to show some respect for fellow gorillas who may not have a choice in what is G, PG, PG-13, R or XXX.


----------



## Pablo (Oct 13, 1997)

LasciviousXXX said:


> I think Paul is referring to the recent Mammiferous thread Bruce.
> 
> Hell, I thought your post was pretty funny (referring to the Short Story posts).


Actually I was not referring to any individual post, in fact I am not even familiar with the one mentioned above.

My only thought is that I would like to keep this in the format of a gentlemens smoking lounge. We do an OK job of being respectful of everyone on the board, and I just want to make sure it continues. We actually have lost members due to them being offended by something. In all of these cases though, I think the person leaving CS was being a bit sensitive.


----------



## Pablo (Oct 13, 1997)

RcktS4 said:


> I despise the idea of censorship, but I even more highly revere class and decorum. So far, I haven't seen anything offensive to me on this board. I hope it'll stay that way due to the maturity and goodwill of nearly eveyone I have encountered here.
> CS rocks.


Well said. I like the terms class and decorum. This is not about censorship at all.


----------



## c2000 (Oct 16, 2003)

IHT said:


> i think we've had some seriously "racy" posts.
> i don't have much of a problem with it, but when the TOPIC of the post is just as "racy" that's when it becomes a problem.
> 
> we are adults, and if we know what we're about to look at what could be offensive, then don't open it. especially if the topic is offensive already.
> ...


Well said...Jerry in Minnesota.


----------



## kamikaiguy (Feb 18, 2004)

I voted that we are not on the way to an R rating. But we could slip over the edge really easily. I think we need to keep in mind that fact that the content of the post has seriously declindin the last 3 months. We just need to monitor ourselfs a bit better.


----------



## c2000 (Oct 16, 2003)

I have posted some of the bouncing breast cartoons that have been referred to here.. I'm not going to apologize to anyone for it.. I thought that this was a forum for adults, I did not know that you were letting your kids look at it and that you were on the forum at work..I suppose some of the pictures in the new photo gallery offend people too.. If some people only want posts like what do you drink with your cigar for the 1000th time then so be it..

Jerry in Minnesota.


----------



## Matt R (Dec 12, 1997)

c2000 said:


> I did not know that you were letting your kids look at it and that you were on the forum at work..
> Jerry in Minnesota.


That's a pretty naive statement.

Just to clarify my above feelings though. This isn't about me being offended. Hell, it's nearly impossible to offend me. This is about a brotherhood of guys (girls) looking out for one another. If it affects someone else here in a negative way, it in turn should have at least a minimal affect on the rest of us. It's amazing to me how generous some of us can be with giving away cigars, etc., but to not be generous enough not to risk another person's livelihood is beyond me.


----------



## c2000 (Oct 16, 2003)

Matt R said:


> That's a pretty naive statement.
> 
> QUOTE]
> 
> ...


----------



## G-Man (Feb 20, 2004)

Well, I guess we all know where C2000 stands.

Thanks for making everyone aware.


----------



## El Rey del Mundo (Jul 11, 2004)

What do you expect from a bunch of monkeys?


----------



## txmatt (May 22, 2004)

Who REALLY posted this?



Matt R said:


> I will vote for moving towards "R" rating. Personally, doesn't bother me or affect me at home or at work. But, I know for a fact that it does bother other people here. Some people have positions in their employment that could be jeopardized if they were to be caught with some of the things posted on here. Now, those things may be PG-13 to you or I, but what about to the lady in Human Relations who has had a history of sexual abuse or has been degraded in some form or another, in her past. Do you want to be responsible for her taking out her wrath on a fellow gorilla?? I know I do not. I also don't want to be responsible for a parent having to explain that those bouncing breasts in that picture aren't real, or are just a joke, to their young daughter.
> 
> A few have mentioned that they see worse at other sites. Is that an excuse to bring some of the things that are not as bad here?? We have a PM feature on the board here. This could be used to pass on some of the stuff that may be unsuitable to some audiences. As well, the e-mail feature is there too.
> 
> ...


----------



## Matt R (Dec 12, 1997)

LMAO! It was me, the real me. I'm also guilty of doing the things I think should be stopped. Let me also say, this ONLY pertians to Club Stogie and I hold no opinion as to my actions at any other forum. 


Oh and I tried sticking my opinion up my butt.... wouldn't fit, as I've got someone's foot up there for sitting around all day AT WORK reading these message boards.


----------



## txmatt (May 22, 2004)

Matt R said:


> LMAO! It was me, the real me. I'm also guilty of doing the things I think should be stopped. Let me also say, this ONLY pertians to Club Stogie and I hold no opinion as to my actions at any other forum.


Its good that you clarified this..  I was worried!



Matt R said:


> Oh and I tried sticking my opinion up my butt.... wouldn't fit, as I've got someone's foot up there for sitting around all day AT WORK reading these message boards.


Maybe some of the things you were considering marketing were in the way??

-Matt-


----------



## P-Town Smokes (Jan 7, 2005)

I voted no, only because most of the things you read and see here are on T.V or Magazines. I normally look at the Habanos section and cigar ratings, but I do enjoy the Jokes. Kids are not allowed, or are not suppose to be looking at this club. PG-13 is about all that is here,(for now). Oh, by the way, This club can't be beat, even at PG-13 or R


----------



## Nely (Nov 11, 2004)

Well this is my very humble opinion:
This is a great forum with most of the gorillas here being very civilized. What made me join was the great sense of respect for each other here. Now with all that said, this an adult's public forum, and like grown adults we will always have the occasional joke in which sexuality is involved. I do not approve that explicit, hardcore pictures be posted here. But the once in a while girl in bikini with fake boobs should not be offensive to grown men and women(never the less an avatar!). True, a fair warning that some skin will be seen should more than suffice, and like said before if someone finds that content offensive he/she should not click on the link. Wether you'are at work (like me) or at home. I come from a board that started out great and turned sour, but that seems to be the common disease in all of the boards, and this is by far the most tamed, civilized board I have ever come across, so good luck finding a better one.
To summarize we are a PG-13 with the occasional slip into the R zone. And that's the way I like it!


----------



## linusvanpelt (Jan 19, 2004)

Interesting topic...considering yesterday's R is today's PG-13.

I voted yes, not only because it seemed to be headed that way, but also because I don't see a problem with that. I assumed all the LLG's are adults, with adult opinions and adult ways of expressing them. While scatalogical humor is not my favorite, I'm not against a good raunchy joke or prank or racy photo once in a while. Consider all the LLG's who ordered the Montecristo calendar...even after knowing what it contained.

Cigar smoking itself is an "adult" activity, just like viewing nudes, swearing, and so on. Consider a picture of a nude woman smoking a cigar. Is it appropriate or not??

The approach of a "gentleman's smoking lounge" is good, as long as women are invited, opinions are respected, drinks are served and no minors allowed.


----------



## FunkyPorcini (Jan 13, 2005)

I don't have much to say being as new as I am but I think that perspective can be helpful. When I came here the feeling I got was that it would be in bad taste for me to post something that might offend a looser professional environment. I also got the sense that if I was to step over the line there would be plenty of Killa Gorillas to smack me around.

I've seen some racy posts around but for the most part the ones in bad taste have been ignored by the regulars.


----------



## SilvrBck (Sep 8, 2003)

I think it's a real case of mokey see, monkey do. A few guys get rowdy, others jump into the fray and before you know it, it has degressed into a gorilla free for all. That's cool and all but not everyone is joining the party. So, a friendly reminder from the Alpha Male (PDS) will make people think a little bit about what they post. In my perfect world there'd be all sorts of R to X rated stuff all over this place but that's not why the jungle is alluring to so many people. Just my 2cents.

SB


----------



## LasciviousXXX (Oct 12, 2004)

Matt R said:


> So, IMO, we should try and tone it down a bit. If for no other reason, to show some respect for fellow gorillas who may not have a choice in what is G, PG, PG-13,* R or XXX*.


Hey, I resemble that remark!


----------



## IHT (Dec 27, 2003)

linusvanpelt said:


> Consider all the LLG's who ordered the Montecristo calendar...even after knowing what it contained.


i honestly didn't know what was on the inside of that calendar... but, that's art, not pornography.
also, i'm not holding any other females up to compare to someone in a calendar. (not aimed at your, Linus, just replying, so please don't take it that way)

anyway, i like what LasciviousXXX pointed out. maybe put an "R" that could be used for a "POST ICON" like we have at the bottom of the page. (not many people use them - i do every once in a while)

and i will just say again - 
how can person A hold person B responsible for person A clicking a link that they knew would be rude/crass/raunchy/offending?

responsibility for ones own actions is what i was taught...


----------



## LasciviousXXX (Oct 12, 2004)

You know, I think its all about discretion. You just have to be careful what you put out there.

That being said I've been to a few gentleman's lounges where the talk turns pretty dirty. I don't think it gets that bad here but its all perception anyway.

I think we're ok we just need to keep being good little gorillas and play nicely with others


----------



## MocoBird (Sep 2, 2004)

Nely said:


> To summarize we are a PG-13 with the occasional slip into the R zone. And that's the way I like it!


I'm with Nely on this one. We are all adults. And as far as the Montecristo calendar....I was the one who posted it. I tried to censor her from an "R" rating to a "PG" rating.....remember the cigar cap over her....ahhh...can I say the "N" word now? What the hay...Her nipples as to try to not offend anybody. Sorry if I did.


----------



## singlguy9 (Dec 9, 2004)

I'm for keeping it fairly clean (we are all adults......me withstanding of course  ) ..........most threads and forums are fairly self explanatory.......if you visit the Jokes forum, you might expect a little (or a lot of) tasteless humor.  If it's not your bag, don't look.

Some other boards have an uncensored forum, warning those who access it that it may contain offensive or explicit material. But this place seems more grounded in discussion of cigars, which I like. I wouldn't change anything.

This place is pretty cool........civility is usually the order of the day.


----------



## MocoBird (Sep 2, 2004)

WillyGT said:


> Hey PDS, there are some icons used when starting a new thread (smilies, a little note, and others), maybe there could be one that says "R" or something that advices is a mature Topic.


I'm with Willy on this one. Good idea!!


----------



## Heartpumper (Jul 31, 2004)

Unless my computer is screwed up and I'm missing something, only a few of the Jokes could be considered "R" rated. Never seen potentially offensive photos or discussion on this site, except for counterfeit cuban cigars.

I would hope Club Stogie is NOT a family web site. As others said, cigar smoking and associated discussions should be for legal adults only.


----------



## MocoBird (Sep 2, 2004)

Heartpumper said:


> Never seen potentially offensive photos or discussion on this site, *except for counterfeit cuban cigars*.


*DAMN!!!* Guilty Again!!!! :r


----------



## floydp (Jun 6, 2004)

MocoBird said:


> *DAMN!!!* Guilty Again!!!! :r


Darn it MocoBird,tar and feather him. Whoops he already has feathers and looks pretty tard.

I voted no,seems PG-13 to me. I belong to several forums and just the lack of flames make this site the best I've seen. So much so that I only post on this one. The rest I just read,HardOcp,Aximsite,Sharkeys to mention a few. What some might deem obscene avatars a norm. Just the overall civility in this forum puts CS heads and shoulders above the rest. And I can't say enough the fine job PDS does to make it a more attractive place to hang out and learn about the leaf we so love to smoke and share with others. So in closing Ms. Floydp and I say cheers to you gorillas and gorillarets. If we just treat each other the way we want to be treated I think we'll be ok..


----------



## radar (Dec 31, 1999)

I voted no. I don't see anything here that is even near what I would consider "R" rated. If I take my five year old to the beach here in Florida, he can see any number of thong bikinis or minimal covering of breasts both real and fake. I don't see it as the LLG's responsibility to keep someone else employed or to raise their children. How about the kids that see you smoking? Or worse the kids that see a bikini clad female smoking a cigarette? Your job and your kids are your responsibility alone, you decide what they see when you surf with them around or take them out in public. As far as employment goes, if you work in a place where a picture at a site as tame as CS can cause you problems, then visit CS at home. You are the one who needs the job and it's up to you to keep it. If your job lets you surf at work, then that's cool, if it comes with risks, then don't take them. But I think it is out of line to expect the site or its inhabitants to limit the site to your employers standards.

PC has it's place in society, this being especially true in the work place. But, I would hate to see it impede the discussions here at CS and I hope that that can be avoided. Perhaps an "Enter at you own risk" forum that requires a password for entry, or as suggested earlier, a new icon would suffice, that's Pauls call. I would *HATE* to see this site changed to accomodate a small percentage of the LLG's who surf it at work or with their small children sitting on their laps.

Just my .02.
Radar


----------



## LeafHog (Feb 11, 2004)

I don't think Paul would bother to post this poll if he didn't have some misgivings about the contents of the board. As far as I am concerned, this is Pauls board and I am his guest and I will abide by his rules. I don't think anybody is worried about some crude jokes or coarse language now and then, but some of the visuals might be more than what is appropriate. R rated? Probably not, but it does seem like there is more and more "extra curricular" stuff on the board these days. I am just as guilty of it as anyone else!

I am taking this as a gentle nudge to tone it down a bit. Thats my $0.02.


----------



## Churchlady (Jan 22, 2004)

Ok, one of the female's turn to chime in... I voted yes, although if there had been a pg 13 I would have voted for that instead.

Why? because in the past few months, I've seen (and maybe as a woman, I'm just more attuned to it) the content get raunchier - don't get me wrong the CS Short story was funny as all get out. If you go in the joke section, you know you're going to find some adult content. Some of the avatars are not what I'd call G-rated (granted that's your choice, but it was not an issue in the past). And some threads are downright skin... you have the choice to click a thread, and as long as it's labeled, I won't go there. 

I have this board up most of the work day, and check back during breaks, I'm almost afraid to do that now, and afraid to see if it gets worse.

I'm not saying this needs to be a family board, but we do have a community going here and if someone could get in trouble for having sexual content on their board at work, even if they're allowed to surf at work, I personally would not want to be the one to get them in trouble over something like that. Or worse yet, a young son walks in the room while you're viewing something like the "curves ahead" thread. wanna explain to your wife why your 11 year old is suddenly interested in dad's cigar website? Another concern, although it seems far fetched is that on another board I used to frequent, there are a huge number of men who are trying to beat addiction to ****, I try to respect that some people are trying to fight addictions and do not need to be assaulted with their addiction when they're coming to a site for cigars. I would try to be just as sensitive to the folks who are trying to beat crack addictions by not posting pictures of someone using or bags of crack...

I've been guilty of posting on fluff topics as much as the next gorilla, but in reality, this board is a community of BOTL's and SOTL's and the focus is primarily Cigars. Can someone please explain to me what Breasts have to do with cigars??? I mean, I use my lungs to breath when I smoke, but other than that, I assure you that what's in front of my lungs have no direct purpose in the enjoyment of a cigar - except to catch the occasional fallen ash!


----------



## itstim (Nov 5, 2004)

linusvanpelt said:


> Cigar smoking itself is an "adult" activity, just like viewing nudes, swearing, and so on. Consider a picture of a nude woman smoking a cigar. Is it appropriate or not??


I voted yes. I have to disagree that viewing nudes, swearing, and so on are "adult" activities. Heck, I was doing that when I was a teenager.

What being an adult is, is knowing what is or is not appropriate in certain situations. I know we are all adults, but that does't mean we all like vulgar things. Smoking a cigar and swearing (or looking at nudes) have nothing to do with each other.

I joined this site because I think that a lot of you are really knowledgable about cigars, and many of you are really funny. That is what its all about to me...smoking and talking about cigars and laughing some too.


----------



## TheSmokingHiker (Jan 11, 2005)

itstim said:


> I voted yes. I have to disagree that viewing nudes, swearing, and so on are "adult" activities. Heck, I was doing that when I was a teenager.
> 
> What being an adult is, is knowing what is or is not appropriate in certain situations.


Good call. I think that we are PG-13, and sometimes we go over the edge. There have been very few times when I thought something should be here. I thinkt he best way to stay clean is to really do our best to monitor ourselfs. I know I have told a few jokes that were borderline. Feel free to let me know if you ever feel like I cross a line. I think we just need to hold each other accountable, and respect each other. I mean, I read through this thread, and I read a lot of very respectful responses, and a few not so much...


----------



## dagrinch (Oct 26, 2003)

I think the site is only PG-13 my self, but I would see nothing wrong if it were R. For one, this site should be for adults anyway, no one under 18 should be on it. I know that's easier said, but that's the way it should be. Also, you can be R rated and not raunchy. Big difference. I'm fairly R rated, but know that not everyone wants to hear my best Richard Pryor or Eddie Murphy impersonation. We're all adults here and we all should know do's and don't in mixed company, and what's going too far over the line. Now I'm off the soapbox and the spotlights off me.

Grinch OUT!!! :ms


----------



## coppertop (Dec 29, 2003)

I said no, I still think we are a mostly PG13 site.


----------



## Heartpumper (Jul 31, 2004)

floydp said:


> I belong to several forums and just the lack of flames make this site the best I've seen. If we just treat each other the way we want to be treated I think we'll be ok..


Great response. Let's not ruin the most easy going cigar site- and I don't post at any others because of reasons listed above.

If the powers that be (I nominate Churchlady) want to set some guidelines, fine. A friendly reminder that a post might be inappropriate would work for just about all of us- It happened to me yesterday and I appreciated it.

Who cares if one doesn't view breasts, butts, or offensive jokes on Club Stogie. There is a plethora of those sites elsewhere on the Internet. Maybe post a link with a warning and that's enough.

Did I mention I like this site? :w


----------



## c2000 (Oct 16, 2003)

Heartpumper said:


> Great response.
> If the powers that be (I nominate Churchlady) want to set some guidelines, fine. :w


\

You have got to be kidding................

Jerry in Minnesota.


----------



## coppertop (Dec 29, 2003)

c2000 said:


> \
> 
> You have got to be kidding................
> 
> Jerry in Minnesota.


 :r MAO.....thanks for the morning laugh here in Korea.........and I couldn't agree more. I think the only person here with that type of power should be Paul. Or else it becomes like another cigar board I'm familiar with.


----------



## radar (Dec 31, 1999)

c2000 said:


> \
> 
> You have got to be kidding................
> 
> Jerry in Minnesota.


Amen!


----------



## DAFU (Dec 14, 2004)

Check out my new avatar............. :r


----------



## TheSmokingHiker (Jan 11, 2005)

DAFU said:


> Check out my new avatar............. :r


I like it!!!


----------



## IHT (Dec 27, 2003)

yep, that's pretty damn cool.


----------



## Da Klugs (Jan 8, 2005)

DAFU said:


> Check out my new avatar............. :r


Nice.

And back to the topic...


----------



## radar (Dec 31, 1999)

DAFU said:


> Check out my new avatar............. :r


I like it!


----------



## Churchlady (Jan 22, 2004)

Dafu, love the new avatar!


Hey, I never asked to be the purity police!!! Leave me out of this, although SH, thanks for the vote of confidence. I agree, PDS is the king gorilla here and all shall bow to his will....


----------



## BayouDawg (Nov 6, 2003)

Man, I go out of town for a few days and miss all of the fun! Now I gotta spend the rest of my time searching for whatever post(s) touched all of this off. (I gotta know!)

bd


----------



## kscotty (Aug 28, 2003)

Hmm. YES it is moving in that direction. 

...and your issue is...???

Carry-on...


----------



## God (May 5, 2004)

DonJefe said:


> Oh man Khat said PC! A PC Jungle is a scary thought!!!!! As others have said, I think we are PG-13 and it seems for the most part the members here know the limits.


PC??? If it gets to that I may have to find another hobby... The general public usually doesn't find any political correctness in cigar smokers so why would anyone expect our posts to follow "political correctness"... but then again it takes a lot to offend me so I'm probably a poor one to ask.


----------



## God (May 5, 2004)

By the way... I voted for the "doesn't matter to me"


----------



## IHT (Dec 27, 2003)

yep, god, vengence is yours.


----------



## Steeltown (Jan 18, 2005)

I don't know what to vote for - I personally don't mind if it heads that direction - as of right now, it's far from "R" rated. It doesn't even come up on the radar as the potential of "R" rating, based on what I have seen. 

To me, if you are posting completely naked, uncensored women, then it is R. Would that be a bad thing? Not to me, but I surf this at work and work only, so I wouldn't really want to see a full screen shot of a naked chick (well, I would, but I shouldn't). Any other pictures of semi-clothed women are fine w/ me.

My vote is that I don't care if the forum goes there or not, but I definitely don't think we are there right now.


----------



## LasciviousXXX (Oct 12, 2004)

Nice avatar BTW Steeltown 

Really goes well with the theme of the thread. :r


----------



## Steeltown (Jan 18, 2005)

LasciviousXXX said:


> Nice avatar BTW Steeltown
> 
> Really goes well with the theme of the thread. :r


I thought I'd unveil it at the most appropriate location. It's a PG-13 avatar. Now if she turned around and moved her hand, it would be another story. I can't take credit for it-got it from another site, but I do like it - and she's rocking the Black and Gold.


----------



## Uniputt (Nov 23, 2004)

If Steeltown's avatar is okay, then I'm going to assume mine is too. Heck, it's just a cartoon....and a clothed one, at that. 

Besides, I asked everyone if it was inappropriate when I changed to it. And everyone seemed to enjoy it, with no complaints.

Personally, I think can't really add any more to what's already been said. I think we do a great job of policing ourselves. But every poster has to realize that many of us are viewing in sensitive areas; such as work or around young children. I would certainly hope that there would be a warning before anything objectionable popped up on the screen. I mean, it's just common courtesy.....and no one can have a problem with that, can they? 

Every other forum I am a member of explicitly require a warning. People coming here and posting should know better......it's practically become basic internet decorum for these type of boards. Why is that so hard for people?


----------



## IHT (Dec 27, 2003)

i'm in agreement on your avitar, as i don't have a problem with it (it's a cartoon)...

but i could see how some people might have had an issue with the "title" of a topic.


----------



## dayplanner (Dec 11, 1997)

I think it has been a a hard core "R" for sometime now and is sliding right into XXX at a fast pace. Avatars, signature lines, language and especially videos without warnings.

I have been participating a lot less because of it... I feel it is not in my best interest to be around the content.

Please no flames... just my opinion.


----------



## cmiller (Sep 8, 2005)

Franksmith said:


> I think it has been a a hard core "R" for sometime now and is sliding right into XXX at a fast pace. Avatars, signature lines, language and especially videos without warnings.
> 
> I have been participating a lot less because of it... I feel it is not in my best interest to be around the content.
> 
> Please no flames... just my opinion.


I think it has slid a lot just in the 4 months(if you include pre crash) or so I've been on-board. Particularly pics of scantily clad women. Not that I have anything against them but if the wrong person walked up behind me at the wrong time here at work I'd have some explaining to do. Often a thread that starts out pretty safe turns not safe after someone posts a particularly "nice" pic.


----------



## MikeZ (Sep 23, 2005)

I would agree that the sexy avatars and signature photos of scantily clad women are a bit much when I'm surfing CS at work. I'm in an open area of the office and anyone could walk up behind me at any time. The fact that I surf CS at work isn't a problem, but if a female saw some of the content they wouldn't know that I'm on a cigar forum. It would make it easier on me to not have this kind of content on CS, but I wouldn't ask anyone to change their avatar or signature because of me. I know that I just have to be careful when at the office.


----------



## rumballs (Mar 15, 2005)

MikeZ said:


> I would agree that the sexy avatars and signature photos of scantily clad women are a bit much when I'm surfing CS at work. I'm in an open area of the office and anyone could walk up behind me at any time. The fact that I surf CS at work isn't a problem, but if a female saw some of the content they wouldn't know that I'm on a cigar forum. It would make it easier on me to not have this kind of content on CS, but I wouldn't ask anyone to change their avatar or signature because of me. I know that I just have to be careful when at the office.


that particular problem is easy enough to solve...
User Controls -> Edit Options:


> You have the option to show or hide various elements of messages, which may be of use to users on slow internet connections, or who want to remove extraneous clutter from posts.
> Show Signatures
> Show Avatars
> Show Images (including attached images and images in code)[/quote]
> ...


----------



## germantown rob (Sep 19, 2005)

mmblz said:


> that particular problem is easy enough to solve...
> User Controls -> Edit Options:
> 
> uncheck all three options.


Well struck. I agree, learn the fuctions that can make this not a problem for you. As for content in some posts well "boys will be boys", not that this makes it right but it is still true.


----------



## cmiller (Sep 8, 2005)

mmblz said:


> that particular problem is easy enough to solve...
> User Controls -> Edit Options:
> 
> uncheck all three options.


Bingo, thanks for pointing that out. I just unchecked the show images, the avatars are small enough that I can alt-tab away before anyone gets close enough. Of course now I can't see pictures of cigars.....


----------



## ComicBookFreak (Sep 7, 2005)

MikeZ said:


> I would agree that the sexy avatars and signature photos of scantily clad women are a bit much when I'm surfing CS at work.


Not a jab at you personally, so please don't take this the wrong way. If one is at work, one is there to work not to "surf "the web. Would suggesting one should change their scantily clad sig infringe on ones freedom of expression? Even when it isn't pornographic. Now posting things that would be considered (NWS) should have a disclaimer of sorts. But still my opinion is if one is at work ,why would one be looking at a site not dealing with work, of course unless the boss ok's surfing. If it's ok for someone to "surf " the net then great that's a great work perk. Not to mention that you are looking at a site that discusses things considered illegal in the US. Me personally I like my Sig. Please don't take offense to this none was meant. Just my :2

CBF :w


----------



## MikeZ (Sep 23, 2005)

mmblz said:


> that particular problem is easy enough to solve...
> User Controls -> Edit Options:
> 
> uncheck all three options.


Right you are. I've been around various forums for years now and I'm kicking myself for forgetting I had the option to turn those off.

That said, I still feel that racy avatars, signatures and attachments can and sometimes do go too far here. If this was the Playboy forum, I can understand using a pin up girl for an avatar or signature - and it would be expected practice no doubt. As this is an international cigar forum and not a private men's club, avatars, signatures and photo attachments that are cigar related would seem more the accepted practice here.

I appreciate photos of beatiful women as much as the next person but sometimes it can be taken beyond what some of us would wish to see. Other's no doubt love the racy stuff and generally speaking, it's not a big deal for me. It just makes it tough to surf in public.


----------



## rumballs (Mar 15, 2005)

ComicBookFreak said:


> Me personally I like my Sig.


The only thing that bugs me about your sig is how incredibly tall it is. Unless I'm on my 23" monitor, it takes up a full screen, every time you post


----------



## CrazyFool (Oct 2, 2005)

ComicBookFreak- dont ever remove that sig line, unless you replace it with another fine specimen  

rules are what is wrong with this world, ones desire to control another. If you smoke cigars your a legal adult (or at least post-puberty) and i think places like CS are a refreshing and welcome change to the obsessivley 'PC' world we live in

so take a seat, have a cigar and enjoy some of this worlds most beautiful creations and raunchyist jokes  for Gods sakes enough of this damn world is G or PG, i enjoy having somewhere to joke around in a harmless, yet inappropriate manner
:2


----------



## ComicBookFreak (Sep 7, 2005)

mmblz said:


> The only thing that bugs me about your sig is how incredibly tall it is. Unless I'm on my 23" monitor, it takes up a full screen, every time you post


That's just Stacys incredibely long legs :r j/k
I believe there is a smaller version of the same pic will try to find it and change for this reason.

CBF :w


----------



## colgate (Jan 18, 2005)

Some people are too stupid/poorly bred to know they are being tasteless. Posting sex pics on a public board is tasteless. Post the link or something.

It's not like I can't get an eyeful of attractive opposite sex pics with a couple of clicks. I can. Don't want it here. But sources/links would be nice . Thinking of Klugs Lake pics. Love spontaneous nudity of the college aged female variety. Just make the link text NSFW (not safe for work) and everyone's happy.


----------



## ComicBookFreak (Sep 7, 2005)

colgate said:


> Some people are too stupid/poorly bred to know they are being tasteless. For everyone else may we offer........ IGNORE!
> 
> It's not like I can't get an eyeful of attractive opposite sex pics with a couple of clicks. I can. Don't want it here.


Please ignore me toothpaste. Please


----------



## colgate (Jan 18, 2005)

ComicBookFreak said:


> Please ignore me toothpaste. Please


I took you off ignore long enough to see what you wrote. You didn't disappoint.


----------



## ComicBookFreak (Sep 7, 2005)

colgate said:


> I took you off ignore long enough to see what you wrote. You didn't disappoint.


You didn't disappoint either calling people stupid and poorly bred Mr. Cultural Pariah.

CBF :w


----------



## colgate (Jan 18, 2005)

I like this statement from a cigar website re people who want to post there.

A. No tossers
B. No whingers
C. Refer A and B


----------



## ComicBookFreak (Sep 7, 2005)

mmblz said:


> The only thing that bugs me about your sig is how incredibly tall it is. Unless I'm on my 23" monitor, it takes up a full screen, every time you post


Found the smaller pic mmblz hope that's better as far as size.

CBF :w


----------



## rumballs (Mar 15, 2005)

better. still tall for my taste, but your sig is your sig...


----------



## MikeZ (Sep 23, 2005)

I made one even smaller for you...

Here's the link to use:

http://www.mazworld.com/images/cigars/stacyk100.jpg

...and the image:


----------



## ComicBookFreak (Sep 7, 2005)

MikeZ said:


> I made one even smaller for you...
> 
> Here's the link to use:
> 
> ...


a little too small but will work with mine some more later sure i can "fix" it and make somewhat smaller I appreciate the help Mike and mmblz.

CBF


----------



## LSU_Stogie (Feb 13, 2005)

I would say PG-18...haha get it? Have to be 18 to smoke cigars? Oh n/m...I agree with everyone that we should post a NSFW in front of things not good for business, home, or in my case College Libraries. I dread the day some bodacious babe is sitting behind me in the library as I click on a nude picture of some model...that would just completely ruin me, haha. 

I could careless about racy things just as long as I know it before I view it.

So, please put NSFW (Not-Safe-For-Work) in front of racy or sexual threads.


----------



## D. Generate (Jul 1, 2004)

icehog3 said:


> MMMMM...dgen's nipples.....MMMMMMMM :w


I think it's gone downhill ever since that figure skating pig came here. :tg


----------



## GhostDawg (Sep 17, 2005)

I voted yes, but think that there is a big difference between an R rating and a XXX rating. We are adults and occasionally adults discuss adult things. I think the key is that we need to stay on topic. As long as she is holding a cigar, nudity doesn't bother me.


----------



## dayplanner (Dec 11, 1997)

cmiller said:


> Bingo, thanks for pointing that out. I just unchecked the show images, the avatars are small enough that I can alt-tab away before anyone gets close enough. Of course now I can't see pictures of cigars.....


WHAT????

This place deals with _cigars???_ 

BTW.... would have been cool to see the poll without the "doesn't matter" choice since the people that answered that would have had to say yes or no and thus giving a better indicator of the opinion.

Just thinking out loud


----------



## AAlmeter (Dec 31, 1999)

ComicBookFreak said:


> Would suggesting one should change their scantily clad sig infringe on ones freedom of expression?


Sorry, but I have to comment on this.

a) This is not a site regulated by The US of A. Its regulated by Paul and the mods he has selected and who have generously volunteered their time. If they don't like the fact that you like comic books, they have every right to toss you. Before you get upset, I'm not in any way suggesting that they do, I am saying this is Paul's house, his rules. If he tells you to pledge your soul to the church of PDS under the holy supervision of Louie the LLG, you do it or leave. This is privately owned bandwidth, with no Constitutional protection.

b) Constitutional protection: The 1st Amendment was not established so you could post **** or Howard Stern could say fart, booby, ass, and blow job on the radio. I HATE government regulation, but to hide behind a government limitation designed to allow citizens to speak freely about and criticize their government and their leaders is moronic to me.

I also am not a fan of those who are easily offended. But since we on this board are, from what I gather from the tossing around of the BOTL/SOTL terms, brothers/sisters, I think it would be approprate to respect others by posting a NSFW notice to the links. If we want to see it (and HELL YEAH I do, but thats my decision), click it. If not, don't. It solves a lot of the headaches and BS. Besides, can you imagine the uproar if Filly, Churchlady, Missy Floyd, or T'kay (Im sure I missed some) started posting half naked pictures of David Hasselhoff...or Da Klugs for that matter?

Further, for your work argument. Maybe I own my business and want to do as I please with my time in the office. I still wouldn't want Mary secretary and Johnny sales guy to see that glorious body of a signature you have. Sure, its my company and it is my business what I do while I am there, but it is something I would rather avoid.

Just remember, this is Paul's board. He has been generous beyond belief in letting CS members police each other and make many of the decisions regarding this board (notice who started this poll?). A lot of his PMs (private messages that is) and headaches could be solved by ruling with an iron fist, but he has given us a lot of freedom despite the fact that his cigar budget has been cut short by his asprin expenses. Please respect Paul, the members, and the board.


----------



## AAlmeter (Dec 31, 1999)

Franksmith said:


> BTW.... would have been cool to see the poll without the "doesn't matter" choice since the people that answered that would have had to say yes or no and thus giving a better indicator of the opinion.


How could you have a proper vote without the majority of people voicing the fact that they have no opinions or core beliefs and like play follow the leader? This is America isn't it?


----------



## rumballs (Mar 15, 2005)

AAlmeter said:


> How could you have a proper vote without the majority of people voicing the fact that they have no opinions or core beliefs and like play follow the leader? This is America isn't it?


Polls are almost never neutrally worded. I especially like the phone poll I got a couple times recently because of the proposed smoking ban in Chicago.
"Press 1 if you think smoking should be banned in all restaurants. Press 2 if you don't think it should be banned, or don't care one way or the other."
Pressed 2 and waited to talk to someone, but no. *click* That was all they wanted. Of course now if the percentage of people who pressed 2 is very high they can just maintain that many of them probably don't care... :c


----------



## AAlmeter (Dec 31, 1999)

mmblz said:


> Polls are almost never neutrally worded. I especially like the phone poll I got a couple times recently because of the proposed smoking ban in Chicago.
> "Press 1 if you think smoking should be banned in all restaurants. Press 2 if you don't think it should be banned, or don't care one way or the other."
> Pressed 2 and waited to talk to someone, but no. *click* That was all they wanted. Of course now if the percentage of people who pressed 2 is very high they can just maintain that many of them probably don't care... :c


Were you the one that posted the number of the anti-smoking crowd? Because I did give them a few rings. My GF is now living in downtown Chicago, so besides my anti-anti personality, I have an interest in what happens there.


----------



## rumballs (Mar 15, 2005)

AAlmeter said:


> Were you the one that posted the number of the anti-smoking crowd? Because I did give them a few rings. My GF is now living in downtown Chicago, so besides my anti-anti personality, I have an interest in what happens there.


yeah. i actually haven't called yet, but might tomorrow.
apparently the "final" vote is getting close...
this was actually a different phone call. automated, 1 question survey from the american cancer society (or whatever they're called). and I got the same survey twice. guess they were probably just trying to call the "press 1" folks twice and got me a second time by mistake


----------



## DrStrangelove (Jun 8, 2005)

AAlmeter said:


> b) Constitutional protection: The 1st Amendment was not established so you could post **** or Howard Stern could say fart, booby, ass, and blow job on the radio.


I agree with you that what goes and what doesn't here is pds's call, it's his board - he makes it happen and he calls the shots.

But the supreme court, and myself, disagree with you on your assessment of the 1st amendmant.


----------



## AAlmeter (Dec 31, 1999)

DrStrangelove said:


> I agree with you that what goes and what doesn't here is pds's call, it's his board - he makes it happen and he calls the shots.
> 
> But the supreme court, and myself, disagree with you on your assessment of the 1st amendmant.


Fantastic for the both of you! You both rank as 'special' in my book.

However, I didn't say the 1st didn't cover mindless BS, I simply said its moronic to put "This war is unjust" or "Welfare is a scam" in the same category as "hehehe...boobies...hehe....blow job." The limitation simply wasnt created for that purpose. Just go ask the founding fathers.


----------



## DrStrangelove (Jun 8, 2005)

AAlmeter said:


> Fantastic for the both of you! You both rank as 'special' in my book.
> 
> However, I didn't say the 1st didn't cover mindless BS, I simply said its moronic to put "This war is unjust" or "Welfare is a scam" in the same category as "hehehe...boobies...hehe....blow job." The limitation simply wasnt created for that purpose. Just go ask the founding fathers.


Well, you didn't say that. But that's OK, I'll just take it that I misinterpreted what you wrote.

Regardless, I don't know how you judge speech - and you can do that how you want. But the 1st amendment was created to protect one type of speech as much as much as the other. Both pass the clear and present danger test, and beyond that I don't think the constitution differentiates mindless speech from thoughtful speech, political speech from lewd humour. If it did, we wouldn't have a *right to free speech*. Maybe I'm wrong but I think the founding fathers would agree.

Maybe you don't like Howard Stern, maybe I don't like it when people say the war is unjust. That's OK, it's also OK for people to dissent the war and for Howard Stern to be obscene because the first amendment ensures us that liberty.

Is the first amendment were to classify speech in terms of importance or lend itself to one type of speech more than another, it wouldn't make sense.

I'm not trying to be a dick, just my :2


----------



## steve12553 (Sep 25, 2005)

Two points. Bill of Rights arguements lose a lot of meaning when you are on a legitimate international forum such as this. I have seen members who are in, not just from, at least 4 other countries. I am not counting American military stationed in other countries for obvious reasons. Second, nearly any internet search, carried out to enough pages ends up with a sexual or **** post. **** is on the internet, we don't necessarily need it here. The beauty of CS was that there is reasonably intellegent discussion and exchange of ideas by Cigar Smokers/Hobbyists carried out like adults. "Adults" is the key word. Mature adults enjoy freedom of expression but also exercise reasonable self control. We should think a little, remember what's important here and be able to enjoy ourselfs. We can appreciate each other and learn from each other without going overboard offending each other needlessly. Please notice though, that I used the modifiers "needlessly, reasonable" and other because there are no hard, fast rules unless the administrator(s) of this board decide to pull the plug. I didn't answer the poll by the way because the wording reminded me of the news/ entertainment polls that you frequently see on TV that call for one to be a psychic. If the poll would have said Should instead of IS, Iwould have felt that I might have had a valid opinion.


----------



## Mister Moo (Sep 8, 2005)

(I'd find original work more interesting - but I'm in the "Doesn't matter" camp.)

Nudes and provocatives should probably be buried one more layer down in a more discrete area to prevent inappropriate eyeball scans (kids).


----------



## Da Klugs (Jan 8, 2005)

Da Klugs said:


> Club Stogie is part of its members lives. Just like our lives for the most part things are PG rated here. You get PG-13, and occasionally R rated activities which makes sense since it is the collective thoughts and experience of the members are represented in our posts. There is a big difference between contextually significant or humorous content and merely crass posts. Common sense and Decorum are the words that come to mind.


 :tpd:

I used to be smarter. Then I started hanging out here too much.


----------



## floydp (Jun 6, 2004)

AAlmeter said:


> Fantastic for the both of you! You both rank as 'special' in my book.
> 
> However, I didn't say the 1st didn't cover mindless BS, I simply said its moronic to put "This war is unjust" or "Welfare is a scam" in the same category as "hehehe...boobies...hehe....blow job." The limitation simply wasnt created for that purpose. Just go ask the founding fathers.


Hey as a child I used to play with their kids and the stuff we heard them say, Whew such potty mouths.. :r


----------



## D. Generate (Jul 1, 2004)

I heard Alito once used the "F" word... Just passing it on...


----------



## CrackerJacket (Sep 8, 2005)

One would expect a cigar board to be an adult board.

A simple "NSFW" tag in a subject header would warn people of things that 
are not safe for work.


----------



## Ivory Tower (Nov 18, 2005)

First of all... here's a hint: don't click on the "Mammiferous" link. If you feel guilty doing it at all, just don't. I don't even know what the objectionable content is at this point, as I just joined, however, on what grounds do you believe promoting stogies is any better than looking at boobs? Just asking for your opinions.


----------



## horrorview (Jan 27, 2005)

I love cigars, but I love boobies more. I'm all for more boobies.

In all seriousness, cigar smoking is meant for people over the age of 18 anyway, so as long as people aren't posting pictures that look like gynecological exams or videos of sausage swallowing contests at Sturgis, I think a little bit o' skin is a-okay 

As for profanity, I've been careful not to use it, and I rarely see anyone else use it.

To be honest, I haven't seen anything on here that is any worse than anything you'll see flipping through a night of television. 

Well, except for the guy with the pubic hair Castro avatar, but that just rules.


----------



## MiamiE (Mar 5, 2005)

Franksmith said:


> I think it has been a a hard core "R" for sometime now and is sliding right into XXX at a fast pace. Avatars, signature lines, language and especially videos without warnings.
> 
> I have been participating a lot less because of it... I feel it is not in my best interest to be around the content.
> 
> Please no flames... just my opinion.


sorry bud, your living in the wrong country.

i say keep CS the way it is. if you dont like something, dont click on it. personally, i dont see half the 'bad' things that are posted, which most are PG-13 anyways.


----------



## Blueface (May 28, 2005)

I say we just run the forum past a strict sect of munks and see what they think.
What do you think they will think?


----------



## Blueface (May 28, 2005)

Wait a minute, did someone use #$*#&*( for words?
That is just not acceptable and should be represhensible.
I say three hail Marys and one Our Father is due.


----------



## MiamiE (Mar 5, 2005)

and a Glory Be


----------



## RumblePen (May 17, 2005)

I voted No. More sexy pics please.


----------



## IHT (Dec 27, 2003)

for some of you that weren't here when this came about....

it was mainly about the title of a topic in the Everything but Cigars area (before there were other moderators), and it was called "BIG ASS TITTIES".

now, the title itself should have been re-done, or thought of something different before posting. if you read the beginning of this topic, you'll notice some ppl just wanting a disclaimer in the title, like "NSFW"...

at that point, it's on THE PERSON CLICKING THE DARN MOUSE. if they know it's NSFW and they still click on it, and they are offended, they should go shove their head in a toilet and flush.

i've been one to post some offensive stuff, mainly what others feel are "curse" words (which i don't believe in - sorry, they're just words), but a picture here and there that hasn't been appropriate...

if you want my takes on this, go back to pages 1 and 2 and read. if you don't, which i don't blame you, that's cool with me as well.


----------



## Jeff (Jan 2, 2005)

IHT said:


> at that point, it's on THE PERSON CLICKING THE DARN MOUSE. if they know it's NSFW and they still click on it, and they are offended, they should go shove their head in a toilet and flush.


You have a great knack for verbalizing exactly what a lot of us think sometimes. I'm glad when someone just comes out and says how they feel instead of pussyfooting around.


----------



## Da Klugs (Jan 8, 2005)

Jeff said:


> You have a great knack for verbalizing exactly what a lot of us think sometimes. I'm glad when someone just comes out and says how they feel instead of pussyfooting around.


The sisters like him as well.


----------



## Aaron (Nov 28, 2005)

IHT said:


> for some of you that weren't here when this came about....
> 
> it was mainly about the title of a topic in the Everything but Cigars area (before there were other moderators), and it was called "BIG ASS TITTIES".


If "ass titties" are involved, even if they're "big", I don't think I could go for that. I mean, what are "ass titties" anyway? Tits on an ass? u That's just wrong and they have no place on CS.


----------



## 17Crash (Jan 21, 2006)

MiamiE said:


> sorry bud, your living in the wrong country.
> 
> i say keep CS the way it is. if you dont like something, dont click on it. personally, i dont see half the 'bad' things that are posted, which most are PG-13 anyways.


wait a minute. if franksmith doesn't like the nude pictures on his cigar site, he has a right to chime in. this is a democracy, and if a majority of people don't like something...it needs to change. it's not a fair argument to say "your living in the wrong country" because someone doesn't want to be exposed to adult content. it's dismissive of him. do people need pornography so bad that they have to put it everywhere? is the web running out of **** sites, so we have to put it on our cigar one? hey, i don't come to club stogie for naked women and i don't buy penthouse for pictures of cigars. if i want to see naked women, i know where to go. but keep things in their rightful place.


----------



## dayplanner (Dec 11, 1997)

17Crash said:


> wait a minute. if franksmith doesn't like the nude pictures on his cigar site, he has a right to chime in. this is a democracy, and if a majority of people don't like something...it needs to change. it's not a fair argument to say "your living in the wrong country" because someone doesn't want to be exposed to adult content. it's dismissive of him. do people need pornography so bad that they have to put it everywhere? is the web running out of **** sites, so we have to put it on our cigar one? hey, i don't come to club stogie for naked women and i don't buy penthouse for pictures of cigars. if i want to see naked women, i know where to go. but keep things in their rightful place.


Stop stirring the pot. One thing that is required here is a thick skin. If you can't take a joke, or are easily offended or very political this is not the place for you. There hasn't been any **** posted here. You should have seen the troubles another board I frequent had 

Most racey stuff is posted NSFW (Not Safe For Work). If you don't want to see it, don't click it


----------



## 17Crash (Jan 21, 2006)

carbonbased_al said:


> Stop stirring the pot. One thing that is required here is a thick skin. If you can't take a joke, or are easily offended or very political this is not the place for you. There hasn't been any **** posted here. You should have seen the troubles another board I frequent had
> 
> Most racey stuff is posted NSFW (Not Safe For Work). If you don't want to see it, don't click it


Gotcha. I just thought this thread was asking us for our opinion.


----------



## c2000 (Oct 16, 2003)

I thought this thread was dead and buried,,put it back in its coffin and let it rest in peace..

Jerry in Minnesota


----------



## dayplanner (Dec 11, 1997)

17Crash said:


> Gotcha. I just thought this thread was asking us for our opinion.


It is. Didn't mean to come off sounding like a jerk, but your post was pretty direct. And keep in mind CS is not a democracy, PDS has final say in all matters.


----------



## FpDoc77 (Nov 30, 2005)

I was hoping we were moving in the X-rated direction.  In all seriousness this place is tame.


----------



## IHT (Dec 27, 2003)

dang this was over a year and a half ago??


----------



## floydp (Jun 6, 2004)

Yeppers and CS is to the mild side of R still.


----------



## Kayak_Rat (Nov 28, 2005)

floydp said:


> Yeppers and CS is to the mild side of R still.


Didnt know yens got that far in the alphabet Frank.


----------



## ca21455 (Jul 23, 2006)

PG-13, the Mods do a good job keeping it real for everyone to enjoy!


----------



## Charles (Sep 28, 2005)

I had forgotten all about this. Anyone heard from The Prince recently? He always has some of the best photos.


----------



## jxpfeer (Aug 14, 2006)

damn, i didn't even pay attention to the date, and i just voted in the poll heheh


----------



## Poriggity (Dec 8, 2005)

I know its an old thread, but I don't see much R rated stuff.. Then again, I usually stick to the cigar related forums, and RARELY venture into the off topic stuff.. so what do I know?
Scott


----------



## Sturat (May 7, 2006)

I visit the site from work sometimes and on occasion I have opened a post that had a link to graphic nudity or had a nude pictures in included in the post.

This has the potential to get some people in a lot of trouble at work depending on the company.

I'm personally not offended by it but I would hate to see someone loose their job because of it.


----------



## LasciviousXXX (Oct 12, 2004)

Sturat said:


> I visit the site from work sometimes and on occasion I have opened a post that had a link to graphic nudity or had a nude pictures in included in the post.
> 
> This has the potential to get some people in a lot of trouble at work depending on the company.
> 
> I'm personally not offended by it but I would hate to see someone loose their job because of it.


Definitely understandable. For the most part people usually include a *NSFW* disclaimer on links such as these but sometimes it slips through the cracks on occassion.

If you find one like that let me know and a *NSFW* can be added before the link.

XXX


----------



## jgros001 (Jun 14, 2005)

Sturat said:


> I visit the site from work sometimes and on occasion I have opened a post that had a link to graphic nudity or had a nude pictures in included in the post.
> 
> This has the potential to get some people in a lot of trouble at work depending on the company.
> 
> I'm personally not offended by it but I would hate to see someone loose their job because of it.


Stay away from DaKlugs' posts in the Habanos Lounge...that is some graphic **** (they are usually old and naked).


----------



## Bob (Jun 29, 2006)

Wow! old thread...Since i have been married to a stripper all these years I guess I will just keep my typing to myself...But is saying the word stripper get an "R" rating??


----------



## Fumioso (Apr 28, 2006)

I have learned to avoid the Photoshop thread. Feckin disgusting! But aside from that, I have only been offended by the pictures of multiple boxes of H. Upmann Super Coronas. :dr 

What's really awful is that I've had disturbing dreams about both the photoshop thread and Super coronas. But not together -- nobody is pulling a super corona out of someone's a$$, thank God.


----------



## c2000 (Oct 16, 2003)

since this thread floated to the top again,,I'll just say I like it as dirty as it can get.


Jerry in Minnesota.


----------



## ColdCuts (Jul 21, 2006)

Bob said:


> Since i have been married to a stripper all these years I guess I will just keep my typing to myself


That's fine, keep the typing to yourself, but how about sharing some pics of your wife?!


----------



## Skinsfan (Aug 4, 2006)

I was very turned on by some RP **** I saw in another thread.:dr


----------



## CrazyFool (Oct 2, 2005)

not this thread again!! wheres TXMatt to peer pressure me into showing pics of the wife again?


----------



## Bob (Jun 29, 2006)

The guys with the Bodacious Smokes really get to me!!:w


----------



## IHT (Dec 27, 2003)

been almost a year since this has seen the light of day. bump.

some of the newer members would be wise to read the first post back in *JAN 05.*


----------



## KingGeorge (May 24, 2007)

R? Were there pictures of naked people on here?

I'm pretty new and I've been gone for about a week but what on here is considered 'R'?


george


----------



## Irons (Jun 7, 2007)

As long as it anything that is *NSFW* is labled as such (or have it's own section), I'm fine with this. Outside of someone's bouncing anime boobs icons, there isn't much here that would be a probelm for me at work.


----------



## MrBlack (Jun 22, 2007)

if its just pg 13, we can say F*CK as long as its a noun, not a verb...

*so you can say:*

You F*CKER

*But you can't say:*

Go F*CK yourself

:bn


----------



## IHT (Dec 27, 2003)

*THIS WAS JUST A BUMP.*
nothing new has happened, just a way for some of the newer members to see that we've debated on what the content here on CS should be and how it's represented.
last spring, i think, we were having a little too much skin in "contests" and things like that... every once in a while, the newer members who haven't seen these topics might take the time to read the first ffew posts.

wasn't trying to bring it back up for discussion.


----------



## hornitosmonster (Sep 5, 2006)

Just the fact this site is tobacco related makes it questionable for many of us at work. Unless we run or own the biz I would think the techs at work do not like us visiting this website. Just my :2


----------



## Andyman (Jun 8, 2004)

Things have changed a lot since then.. Thanks to the mods for keeping the site "in check"


----------



## Syekick (Jun 5, 2007)

At my age and where I have been in life if I haven't "heard it all", I've certainly heard most of it.

The input from the moderators in providing "stick and rudder" concerning blantant posts gets my support. So no, we're not headed to and R rating, just going through a phase. That's the thrill of being a moderator. The sheepdogs of the forum.

http://www.townhall.com/Columnists/MikeSAdams/2007/06/11/three_kinds_of_people


----------



## RHNewfie (Mar 21, 2007)

I think that the majority of our content is quite family and work safe. We may stray from time to time but it is rarely blatantly offensive.


----------



## Razorhog (Jun 1, 2007)

txmatt said:


> There have been a few recent posts I would not have wanted to pull up at work but nothing too bad.
> 
> Another board ([H]ardOCP maybe?) has people NSW in front of a post that has graphics that may be objectionable. I would ask that members use this, A/C or a similar flag in the Title of any such post.. Problem solved IMO..
> 
> -Matt-


:tpd:


----------



## guy g (Apr 17, 2007)

I think it's fairly mellow here. Other forums I've been on have a section or two for 'R' content.


----------



## Da Klugs (Jan 8, 2005)

Syekick said:


> At my age and where I have been in life if I haven't "heard it all", I've certainly heard most of it.
> 
> The input from the moderators in providing "stick and rudder" concerning blantant posts gets my support. So no, we're not headed to and R rating, just going through a phase. That's the thrill of being a moderator. The sheepdogs of the forum.
> 
> http://www.townhall.com/Columnists/MikeSAdams/2007/06/11/three_kinds_of_people


Caption this.... 










Lot's of changes here based upon the growth of the forum. Some good some necessary but in some ways a step backward.


----------



## Guest (Jul 21, 2007)

IHT said:


> *THIS WAS JUST A BUMP.*
> nothing new has happened, just a way for some of the newer members to see that we've debated on what the content here on CS should be and how it's represented.
> last spring, i think, we were having a little too much skin in "contests" and things like that... every once in a while, the newer members who haven't seen these topics might take the time to read the first ffew posts.
> 
> * wasn't trying to bring it back up for discussion*.


Rabble-Rouser:r:r

Thanks for the Bump, Greg!


----------



## cigarsinheaven (Jun 15, 2007)

As a newbie I don't know as much about what CS has been in the past but I would have to say that most of what I've seen didn't cross the line and as many have pointed out if you find it offensive don't read it. As one who brings a background in Christian ministry, a parent, grandparent I feel comfortable with the site. CS has daytime soap operas, not to mention primetime beat in the "ceanliness" category. If it goes no futher I se no problem.

cigarinheaven


----------



## fordkustom (Jun 28, 2007)

what i would ask is how many underage kids are ever seeking cigars? cigarettes all the time but not cigars. so r rated ? no


----------



## Tour De Cigar (Feb 26, 2007)

why would u think this forum is becoming rated R... :tu


----------



## Dzrtrat (Oct 9, 2006)

I think that its all subjective. What offends one may not offend another. I do for the most part think its pretty tame and considerate around here so an "R" rating I give a no.


----------



## Smoked (Apr 12, 2007)

I have had my fair share of issues here because of my posts. I thought that they were fine but apparently they were not. Now I just don't post as much and try not to post anything that a kid should not read. Personally, I think that some of the people here are offended way too easily. It's not my website though and if people want to keep it safe for kids that's ok by me.


----------



## plexiprs (Nov 18, 2005)

I would prefer that it remain work friendly, even if that means creating specific areas for more adult "discussions." It is a difficult issue, but access and the ability to view in a variety of environments is a key issue to me.

I don't belong to or visit any websites that my friends, family, or employer would question, and I really don't want to start hiding a guilty little pleasure like CS.


----------



## Sawyer (Jul 11, 2007)

As long as there aren't T&A pictures in threads, I couldn't care less what is posted here. And that is only because I check this board at work. Don't get me wrong, I am all for T&A threads. As long as I can tell before I am click on them if I am at work. The NSFW designation should be enough.


----------



## smokeyscotch (Apr 26, 2007)

I think there is some material on here sometimes that might be NSFW.
The poster usually announces this though. For the most part, I just notice good banter and love of the leaf.


----------



## partagaspete (Apr 27, 2004)

IMHO. As long as it is not strong "R" or higher and as long as the poster post's NSFW. I have no issue...What is strong "R" or higher is completely subjective. 

T


----------



## havana_lover (Feb 15, 2007)

nsfw is enough for me.. :2


----------



## Throb (Jan 12, 2006)

havana_lover said:


> nsfw is enough for me.. :2


:tpd: i agree


----------



## gnukfu (Dec 19, 2007)

I would call this a PG site. I guess I must have missed the R rated stuff. Looks to me like a bunch of adults who participate in an adult activity discussing a bunch of stuff adults discuss.


----------



## IslandRick (Aug 20, 2007)

LasciviousXXX said:


> I believe that we like all sites have our moments where the content might not be terribly appropriate but the majority of content on CS is pretty PG-13. Just my opinion but I appreciate the intelligent discussions that are held as well as some of the more off-the-wall silly threads.
> 
> So in summary, no... I think we're keeping some semblance of civility


I agree.

Rick
:cb


----------



## dayplanner (Dec 11, 1997)

One of the things I appreciate the most about CS is being able to check this board regularly from work without having to worry about flagging content filters. 

I agree that NSFW is sufficient.


----------



## IHT (Dec 27, 2003)

gnukfu said:


> I would call this a PG site. I guess I must have missed the R rated stuff. Looks to me like a bunch of adults who participate in an adult activity discussing a bunch of stuff adults discuss.


while true, if you notice when this thread was started, we were having some "issues".

and some of the previous posts mention that the majority of ppl can/do view this while at work, and some on the family computer (with wifey and kids running around).

we're all adults, but being warned prior to clicking a topic that there's adult content is very helpful.


----------



## Chico57 (Nov 12, 2007)

Granted that I have only been a member for a short time, but was a lurker for awhile, I have never seen any content that I felt was the slightest bit offensive on the threads that interested me.
However, for those who are concerned about viewing this site at work (not to get off topic and being a business owner) the viewing of this site or any other non work related websites while "on the clock" that result in non-productive use of time can be equated to stealing form your employer. Think about it.


----------



## walleye (Oct 21, 2006)

CS folks have always been respectful and helpful. We do add a dash of humor at times, but it is done with the best intentions and never a personal attack on any one. We share our opinions, and even in disagreement we can learn something helpful about a brand. We are also respectful to new folks who really have questions about cigars and want to join us in the love of the leaf.

There are other cigar sites which folks really tear into a new person or hammer what is perceived as a "rookie" or "noob" question. CS folks rule and are gentlemen and women to all leaf lovers.


----------



## MarkinCA (Jun 13, 2007)

pds said:


> Club Stogie does not want to become one of those sites you have to hide when kids are around, or the content is questionable at work. The fact is many of our users visit the site while at work, and many of us have kids. We are growing quite fast, and want to remain clean and focused. Your opinion is appreciated on the following poll.


I strongly agree. Let's keep it clean and focused pds...:tu


----------



## gnukfu (Dec 19, 2007)

IHT said:


> while true, if you notice when this thread was started, we were having some "issues".
> 
> and some of the previous posts mention that the majority of ppl can/do view this while at work, and some on the family computer (with wifey and kids running around).
> 
> we're all adults, but being warned prior to clicking a topic that there's adult content is very helpful.


Yep I agree absolutely with the warning. :tu


----------



## LasciviousXXX (Oct 12, 2004)

Wow, talk about a blast from the past LOL

This thread is over 3 years old  Interesting to go back and see where we were back then.


----------



## Volt (Jan 6, 2008)

So far with the exception of teh body rolled cigar  it is pg13 as noted. I would have no iisues with a section called NSFW if the comunity wanted one. Either you visit or not, personal choice.


----------



## EvanS (Dec 29, 2006)

I think we are at a solid PG13 with occasional R elements. Nothing much bothers me personally but in terms of keeping the focus topical to the site's original intent I would think vigilance in staying at the PG13 content would be appropriate.


----------



## Bubba -NJ (Dec 6, 2005)

I voted yes because of the thread the other day with the smoking in leather video . And also because of some of the avatars and language . Another choice could have been " Do I want CS to become R - rated "


----------



## gnukfu (Dec 19, 2007)

LasciviousXXX said:


> Wow, talk about a blast from the past LOL
> 
> This thread is over 3 years old  Interesting to go back and see where we were back then.


:r I didn't even notice that! Soooo did George Bush get elected for a second term?


----------



## tonyrocks922 (Mar 6, 2007)

Chico57 said:


> However, for those who are concerned about viewing this site at work (not to get off topic and being a business owner) the viewing of this site or any other non work related websites while "on the clock" that result in non-productive use of time can be equated to stealing form your employer. Think about it.


That completely depends on the job. Part of my job is just being available for my clients all day long, even if there is no specific work. My employer has no problem with me surfing the web while I wait for emails and calls to come in.


----------



## Silky01 (Jul 16, 2007)

EvanS said:


> I think we are at a solid PG13 with occasional R elements. Nothing much bothers me personally but in terms of keeping the focus topical to the site's original intent I would think vigilance in staying at the PG13 content would be appropriate.


:tpd: Site's perfect as is IMHO.


----------

